"Those in favor of covering the murals have said some of the images are offensive to various groups."

The New York Times reports that "the San Francisco Board of Education voted unanimously this week to cover a series of murals at George Washington High School that includes images of a dead Native American and slaves at work."

Somehow it will cost between $600,000 and $845,000 to cover them up.

Times columnist Bari Weiss is not amused:

"The implications of this logic are chilling. What happens when a student suggests that looking at photographs of the My Lai massacre in history class is too traumatic? Should newspapers avoid printing upsetting images that illuminate the crisis at the border, like the unforgettable one of Óscar Alberto Martínez Ramírez and his 23-month-old daughter, Valeria, facedown, drowned in the Rio Grande?  All are fair game for censorship in a worldview that insists that words and images are to be judged based on how 'safe' they make people feel."

Michael Kimmelman concurs:  "This is so appalling, a school board so shockingly reactionary, repressive and idiotic in the name of 'protecting' students that you wonder if its next move will be to burn books."

As does Charles Desmarais:  "I dread the day when another, and then another group or individual sets out to question a work of art in the public realm, not in the spirit of criticism and learning but to permanently deny us all the opportunity to judge for ourselves. I fear a time when nothing but the commercially sponsored and the innocuously peripheral make up our visual environment. Then we all will live in a poorer city, and the censors will know they were the cause."

"A federal judge in New York rejected Sotheby’s bid to dismiss a $380 million lawsuit where Russian billionaire Dmitry Rybolovlev accused the auction house of helping his longtime art dealer’s scheme to overcharge him on dozens of masterworks."

Story here.  Sounds like it was a forum non conveniens motion.

Some background here.

"US judge tosses lawsuit against glass artist Dale Chihuly"

It was a co-authorship claim brought by a former studio assistant who, as many studio assistants do, helped in the creation of certain works.  The court held, on summary judgment, that, because (1) "Chihuly superintended the production of the works and had unilateral control over the finished products" and (2) "no reasonable fact finder could conclude that plaintiff harbored even a subjective intent to be a co-author, much less that the parties objectively manifested such an intent" ("plaintiff never identified himself as the author of the works, he raised no objections when defendant failed to identify him as co-author, and he made no claim of authorship prior to the 2017 demand letter that preceded this action"), there was no co-authorship.  Story here.

More on the Sotheby's News

Who Is New Sotheby’s Owner Patrick Drahi?

What the Sotheby’s Sale Means for the Future of the Art Industry.

Bloomberg analysis.

Sold!

Sotheby's has been bought by French-Israeli telecommunications entrepreneur Patrick Drahi for $3.7 billion and will be taken private.

Lots of commentary out there:

New York Times.

Wall Street Journal.

Georgina Adam.

Felix Salmon.  (Bottom line:  "Buying Sotheby's gives Drahi much more clout among the global ultra-wealthy than he would get from buying $3.7 billion of art. It will also increase his name recognition in the U.S., where he has long harbored ambitions to build a major cable empire.")

Second time as farce

The Barnes Unit of the Deaccession Police, having failed to stop the entire move of the museum to Philadelphia, is now protesting the recent sale, at the famed Pook & Pook auction house in Downingtown, Pennsylvania, of "156 lots of around 430 objects that had belonged to [Albert] Barnes and his wife Laura," including "furniture, clocks, textiles and porcelain objects," for a total hammer price of $98,000.  One attendee described it as "minor material—the cleaning out of an office," an office whose contents, they will have you know, were surely held in the public trust.

Another Mamacha Lawsuit

This one, for not paying an artist.  Last time it was for trademark infringement.

Frida Kahlo name/likeness lawsuit

Story here.

Gallery Employee Trade Secrets Lawsuit Settled

Story here.  Background here.

"The judge concurred, asserting that if one were to put the two prints next to each other, the 'common person would point to one and say, "Hey, that’s a Warhol!" So that is its own work of art.'"

Oral argument Monday in the Warhol Foundation fair use lawsuit.  Background here.

The sad Peter Max story just got even sadder (UPDATED)

NBC News:  Mary Max, wife of psychedelic artist Peter Max, found dead by suicide in New York apartment.

Related.

UPDATE:  Here's the New York Times story.

"According to court documents obtained by The Blast, Silver and the Gagosian Gallery mutually agreed to drop the case for good."

Here's a report that "movie producer Joel Silver dropped his massive lawsuit against [Gagosian] over a Jeff Koons sculpture not long after the gallery called him out because his case had been secretly funded by billionaire Ronald Perelman, who previously had his own legal beef with the gallery."

Background here and here.

"The bank CGD lent the entrepreneur around €400m...Bernardo’s collection ... was pledged as collateral."

The Art Newspaper:  ‘Portuguese Saatchi’ in hot water over alleged €1bn debt.

"According to the District Court of Puerto Rico, the artist has no claim for the destruction of the mural (because it is site-specific)" (UPDATED)

Amelia Brankov on a VARA decision out of Puerto Rico.

The decision is here.  It's an application of Phillips v. Pembroke, which I discussed here and here.

UPDATE:  Sergio Muñoz Sarmiento says "it seems to me that this case is not so much about site-specificity as it is about whether or not the artwork can be removed."

"For five years and counting — the latest lawsuit came Friday — the artist’s family, friends and associates have been trading lurid courtroom allegations of kidnapping, hired goons, attempted murder by Brazil nut, and schemes to wring even more money out of what was already one of the most profitable art franchises in modern times." (UPDATED)

Amy Chozick in the New York Times on the sad saga around Peter Max.

UPDATE:  The Art Market Monitor says it's less a story about Max than it is about Park West Gallery, "a company called out many times for its abusive practices ‘auctioning’ art on cruise ships. Their auctions are really a form of theater where buyers act out an auction for low-value art they’ve been told is an asset."  Some Park West background here.

Tell me again about the public trust (300 Chinese artworks edition) (UPDATED)

The Art Institute is selling 300 works that, having fallen under the aegis of a museum, are not held in the public trust for present and future generations and will not cause potential donors to ask themselves "Why should I give this to you?  What guarantee do I have that you're not going to sell this tomorrow?"

It's really a fortunate thing that museums do not hold works in the public trust and so are able to make these kinds of sales when necessary.

UPDATE:  It's a deaccessioning "spree."

"Ai Weiwei Is Suing Volkswagen for Using His Installation of Refugee Life Jackets in an Advertisement"

In Denmark.

"The policy is being made possible by a $10 million donation by the board president, Carolyn Clark Powers."

LA MOCA is going admission free.

So here's a question:  suppose a museum that isn't lucky enough to have a board member like Carolyn Clark Powers could accomplish the same thing by selling a single work of art from its collection.  Would that be worth doing?  If not, why not?

"Under New York law, you better put your blinds down. He’s lucky he wasn’t standing there buck naked."

Breaking:  "Alex Rodriguez ‘Has No Case’ Against Photographer Of Viral Toilet Photo Under Lenient New York Law."

First appearance for A-Rod at the blog, and, I think (but would have to double check), first use of "viral toilet photo."

But not the first appearance of the legal issue it presents.  See here.

"Actor and Artist Val Kilmer Says He Definitely Did Not Steal an Artist’s Idea for a Sculpture, Despite a Lawsuit"

"Texas-based sculptor Bale Creek Allen filed a lawsuit last fall claiming that Kilmer stole his idea for a golden tumbleweed sculpture. Allen, who has been selling his own tumbleweed sculptures for several years through galleries in Texas and New Mexico—including one he runs himself—asserts that that actor knowingly took his concept and copyrighted means of production."